Ein Stein wrote:That's because asymmetric maps are imbalanced. When both sides play correctly, there's one side who will always win.

I don't get the reason for this.

I agree that every symmetric map is balanced, because of math. But there can also be balanced asymmetric maps. It would be challenging to (a) balance and (b) play. Who do you think will win in Sleepy 1 and Traitor?

Define "play correctly" ... ?

I'm with LuBeNo on this one. And I would really like to see a non-syetrical map layout

Think of tic-tac-toe. The first player always wins if both players make the best moves.

We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them.

I agree that every symmetric map is balanced, because of math. But there can also be balanced asymmetric maps. It would be challenging to (a) balance and (b) play. Who do you think will win in Sleepy 1 and Traitor?

Define "play correctly" ... ?

I'm with LuBeNo on this one. And I would really like to see a non-syetrical map layout

Think of tic-tac-toe. The first player always wins if both players make the best moves.

I disagree. Best possible moves always results in a draw. In all games.

So you're comparing Gladiabots to a solved game like tic-tac-toe? Not a complex one, like chess (unsolved so far, despite supercomputers attempting to solve it)? I think Gladiabots possibilities for AI complexity approaches, if not surpasses, chess. Until it's completely solved (which I doubt will ever happen), it's safe to assume that any strategy (if equal numbers of bots are involved) that could be faced could also be countered. So there is no unwinnable situation based solely on non-symetrical map setup

Ein Stein wrote:Think of tic-tac-toe. The first player always wins if both players make the best moves.

I disagree. Best possible moves always results in a draw. In all games.

This is correct

That said, I understand what Ein is trying to say, and I agree with him. An asymmetrical map is by no means guaranteed to be balanced to have an equal or at least similar chance to win from either side, and there is no way I could be happy with risking putting in such a map without playing on it when there are still other maps that are just as valid. And when we are risking our ranking for those maps, I don't think it is a good idea

Although, can I request that votes Iike this in the future first have a release that includes all of these maps to test against (or even a version with only the community made test maps) to have an informed decision for asymmetrical maps, because otherwise, I think Meeting Point with be the only asymmetrical map in the game, ever

Actually, no I checked that as well. Barred is symmetrical, but unless you are able to draw in an image of how Meeting Point has axial or central symmetry (particularly when adding in the instantiation order), you are wrong